The K10

[joegold]

"That is an essential difference between a "guitar speaker" and an FRFR device. It is the job of the cab sim to soften the attack, exactly as its physical counterpart would."

If that's the case then every IR I've ever tried, including the stock IRs and hundreds of 3rd party IRs, are not doing their jobs correctly.

"It is not a problem."

Lol.
For *me* it most definitely is a problem.
It's a problem that will prevent me from using an FRFR rig until after I've solved it because real guitar speakers just plain sound way better than this.

"If you didn't experience exactly the same thing with your NS-10s, it is only because they lack high frequencies."

Well, I've been able to tame the top end of the K10 using EQ to some degree.
But it still sounds unnatural and unmusical vis a vis the transients.
The nature of the transients on the NS10s don't seem to be an issue for me.

"There is no "unnatural" harshness in the K10. If it sounds harsh to you, it is because the signal you are sending it contains that harshness."

Yet the vibe thru the NS10s is completely different, warmer and more musical sounding.
Of course I can't play the NS10s at anywhere near the volume that I can play the K10s at.
I'm sure that part of my problem is simply not being used to hearing the top end coming through a tweeter at loud volumes.
But at similar volumes my guitar speakers do not exhibit the same peaky-ness in the attack.

At one point I thought that maybe I could use a Multi-band compressor to compress the highs only, but that FX block just confuses me. lol
I have no idea how to use it intelligently.

 

[guitarman19853]

I feel like this is a dumb question that might result in a "RTFM"... but all of these corrections require PEQ in the chain, which is great, but I'm sending output 2 to my monitor and output 1 to FOH where I don't want to apply these PEQ settings to... Can I do this?

Right now I have globally Copy Out 1 to Out 2. I imagine I need to turn that off.

 

[tlainhart]

There is no "unnatural" harshness in the K10. If it sounds harsh to you, it is because the signal you are sending it contains that harshness.

Joe - I had a similar concern re harshness and the K10. Jay responded accordingly in this thread:

http://forum.fractalaudio.com/amps-cabs/34044-global-eq-full-range-flat-response.html

...and helped me better understand the terms of engagement with that speaker, or at least FRFR vs. monitors vs. guitar speakers.

 

[Jay Mitchell]

I feel like this is a dumb question that might result in a "RTFM"...

RTFM would work, but what the hell, we're friends here.

I'm sending output 2 to my monitor and output 1 to FOH where I don't want to apply these PEQ settings to... Can I do this?

Yes.

Right now I have globally Copy Out 1 to Out 2. I imagine I need to turn that off.

Yes. And insert the Fx Loop block prior to the PEQ.

 

[Jay Mitchell]

If that's the case then every IR I've ever tried, including the stock IRs and hundreds of 3rd party IRs, are not doing their jobs correctly.

Did you try all of those IRs with the K10?

For *me* it most definitely is a problem.

You are claiming that a speaker with a depressed HF response is "too bright." You are apparently calibrated to HF-deficient speakers.

I knew you were going to get into this, so I brought Scott's speaker home with me and just spent a half hour playing my presets through it. It is not "too bright." With the EQ corrections, it is tonally well-balanced. While it does not perform nearly as well as my monitor, it is perfectly serviceable. If you do not like what you hear when you play through one of these, then you just don't like what you're sending it. And it's a sure thing that you will like the sound you hear from a flatter, more neutral monitor even less.

Well, I've been able to tame the top end of the K10 using EQ to some degree.

You are missing the fact that there is nothing to tame there. The high end of the K10 is quite flat. Whatever needs "taming" is in the signal you send to the speaker, not in the speaker's characteristic response.

But it still sounds unnatural and unmusical vis a vis the transients.

Then that's what your presets are doing.

The nature of the transients on the NS10s don't seem to be an issue for me.

That's because NS10s lack high end. They were never used for their reference qualities, they became popular because they were reasonably representative of cheap home stereos that were common at the time.

Yet the vibe thru the NS10s is completely different, warmer and more musical sounding.

I'll take direct issue with "more musical." You get "more musical" from making your presets sound " "more musical." And, in the context you're using it, "warmer" just means "deficient in high-frequency content."

 

[joegold]

Jay.
What else can I do to my Presets besides modifying Amp Block parameters, trying other IRs and using EQ to get a more guitar-cab-like top end response and feel from a speaker like the K10?

My Presets sound *great* through my Bryston 2B into an EVM-12L or Mesa C90.
I've been meaning to rent a Fender Twin 65 Re-Issue and try the Axe through its cab but haven't gotten around top it yet.
What I'm expecting to hear when I do this is that the Axe's Double Verb sim into that cab should sound very much like the the real amp into that same cab. That was my experience when I still owned a Mesa Triaxis. I.e. The TA and the Axe sims of the TA sounded nearly identical when going into the same EV equipped cabs.
So, I know that the Axe can sound *great* when monitored this way.

I've been searching for years now for an IR of an EVM-12L that sounds anywhere as musical via FRFR as my real EVM-12L, to no avail.
[The latest 12L IRs from RW and OH are definitely in the ballpark freq resp-wise, but don't *feel* right when you play them, especially the attacks.]

The closest I've been able to get to that sonic signature, when using an FRFR system, is with the stock 2 X 12 Black IR in the Cab Block.
With that IR, I can certainly tweak my Presets and use EQ to tame the top end (and the bottom end) going into the K10, but it doesn't feel right on the transient attacks and it's not fun to play.
If I reduce the top-end too much it starts sounding dull.
If I increase it so that I can hear it in proportions that are relative to what I'd like to hear it sounds harsh on the attacks.
The totality of the tone is *way less musical* than it sounds going through my real EVM-12L or the C90.


I can only conclude from your comments then that FRFR guitar playing will *never* feel good to me.

 

[Jay Mitchell]

My Presets sound *great* through my Bryston 2B into an EVM-12L or Mesa C90.

With or without cab sims on?

I've been searching for years now for an IR of an EVM-12L that sounds anywhere as musical via FRFR as my real EVM-12L, to no avail.

That's what you need. A properly-acquired IR of the cab you use is apparently the only solution if you're going to play through FRFR live or record direct.

The closest I've been able to get to that sonic signature, when using an FRFR system,

How long did you have the K10? I can't speak to anything else you may have tried, but I can say that, if you can't get close with it, there's really no point in trying other FRFR monitors.

 

[scotts]

@joegold
I have two K10s that will probably end up being the wet speakers in my W/D/W rig. Point is I'm going to have them for a while even once I settle on a high end dry cabinet solution. I am currently running one K10 at my gig and getting good results. If you decide to work with the K10 some more that would enable us to be on the same FRFR page so to speak. I would be happy to send patches back and forth with you and see if a little outside help can get you where you want to be.

 

[joegold]

"With or without cab sims on?"

Without.
Give me at least a little bit of credit please. lol

"A properly-acquired IR of the cab you use is apparently the only solution if you're going to play through FRFR live or record direct."

I used to think that too.
But the current crop of Mesa HalfBack 2 X 12 Open IRs from RW and the Thiele cab stuff from OH appear to be properly acquired IRs that do have the essential freq resp of my cab.
They just don't feel good to play through.
And I have acquired my own IRs of my cabs, but I'm sure my process was no where approaching "proper".
My IRs tend to sound less full in the lower mids and bass and a bit brighter than the professional 12L IRs mentioned above, but they're not that far off from the real 12L, at least not in the freq response characteristics.
None of the above mentioned 12L IRs feel anything like it feels to play through a real 12L though.

So here's some questions about what is actually captured when we acquire an IR.
Do speakers not behave differently when driven by varying signal levels, especially attack transients?
Do some guitar speakers exhibit something akin to a type of compression when responding to a loud bright transient?
If so, is this dynamic behaviour captured by the IR recording process?
The process I used for acquiring my IRs involved sending a sine sweep through all frequencies into the 12L, but the amplitude of the signal was the same for all frequencies.
How can a process like this capture the way that the speaker will react to attack transients?

"How long did you have the K10?"

I had it on rent for a week.
I also rented a K10 back in 2009 soon after I first bought my Ultra and had similar experiences back then.
But my Axe tweaking skills are much better nowadays.
I had hoped that this time the 11.0 firmware might make things a bit easier to dial in, and it does, but it's still no cigar so to speak.
Not when my real cabs sound so much better.

"I can't speak to anything else you may have tried, but I can say that, if you can't get close with it, there's really no point in trying other FRFR monitors."

Well, I'm tempted to go buy a K10 and just see if I can learn to live with it because there are certain things about an FRFR rig that really appeal to me, and if the K10 is almost as good as it's gonna get then it might as well be a K10 anyway.

I think I'm going to go out tonight and rent some mid-level near-field studio monitors (Yorkville) just to see what the experience is like next to the NS10s.
I know these aren't great monitors but they have a fairly decent rep around here.

[And before you go and tell me that I should be using far-field IRs, like yours, you should know that I've tried them and they don't get me what I want to be hearing.]

 

[joegold]

@joegold
I have two K10s that will probably end up being the wet speakers in my W/D/W rig. Point is I'm going to have them for a while even once I settle on a high end dry cabinet solution. I am currently running one K10 at my gig and getting good results. If you decide to work with the K10 some more that would enable us to be on the same FRFR page so to speak. I would be happy to send patches back and forth with you and see if a little outside help can get you where you want to be.

thanks. for the offer.
I'll let you know.

 

[Jay Mitchell]

But the current crop of Mesa HalfBack 2 X 12 Open IRs from RW and the Thiele cab stuff from OH appear to be properly acquired IRs

Based on what information?

Do speakers not behave differently when driven by varying signal levels, especially attack transients?

No.

Do some guitar speakers exhibit something akin to a type of compression when responding to a loud bright transient?

No.

If so, is this dynamic behaviour captured by the IR recording process?

See above. The conditional clause in your sentence is not satisfied.

The process I used for acquiring my IRs involved sending a sine sweep through all frequencies into the 12L, but the amplitude of the signal was the same for all frequencies.
How can a process like this capture the way that the speaker will react to attack transients?

To understand the answer would require that you have some command of integral calculus and domain transforms, but I'll state it anyway: The LaPlace Transform of a delta function is a constant.

I had it on rent for a week.

When?

if the K10 is almost as good as it's gonna get

I didn't say that. However, when you say it's too "bright" and "too harsh" when exactly the opposite is true, it is abundantly clear that improved transparency won't help you get what you want.

[And before you go and tell me that I should be using far-field IRs, like yours, you should know that I've tried them and they don't get me what I want to be hearing.]

You have yet to describe "what you want to be hearing." That would be a worthwhile exercise, both for your own understanding and for those who are willing to help you.

 

[joegold]

"Based on what information?"

Lol.
Based on the fact that these two companies have the balls to ask me for money for their IRs.
And based on the way that most of their IRs sound to me compared to the Axe's stock IRs, some of which were done by you yourself.

Thanks for the info on the attack transient characteristics of guitar speakers.
I was obviously expecting the opposite answer.

"The LaPlace Transform of a delta function is a constant."

So then, an IR of a guitar cab *does* capture the way the cab will react to attack transients, right?
Good to know.

"When?"

Most recently I had a K10 on rent from May 25 thru June 1, 2011.
I also had a Yorkville E10P for most of that time and spent a lot of my time A/B'ing between the two.

"I didn't say that."

Sorry to put words in your mouth.
What I meant is that the K10 is about as good as it's gonna get for me in the price range and form factor that I'm willing to operate within and as far as the products that are available for me to check out here in Toronto.
And also that you have suggested that the K10, with your 700 hz cut, is indeed yielding a fairly accurate reproduction of the signal that the Axe puts out, so it appears to be bit of an endorsement from you.

Yet, these Yorkville powered studio monitors I just rented sound fine to me hi-end-wise, and they're a bit brighter than my NS10s.
Of course these speakers can't get real loud. At a louder volume their top end might bug me.

"However, when you say it's too "bright" and "too harsh" when exactly the opposite is true, it is abundantly clear that improved transparency won't help you get what you want."

Hmm. It's not so much that the quantity of the high-end content is too much with the K10s.
It's that it doesn't sound good.

"You have yet to describe "what you want to be hearing." That would be a worthwhile exercise, both for your own understanding and for those who are willing to help you."

C'mon over any time and I'll show you.
lol
I've tried to describe it to you many times over the last few years.

Thanks for trying to help me Jay, really.
It must be frustrating for you trying to communicate what needs to be communicated in these conversations.
I only know what I hear and what I want to hear.

Again, I might just buy a K10 anyway and see if I can used to it.
Other options around here are pretty slim.

But if the high freq content of the K10 is actually a bit "subdued" then it's unlikely that I'll *ever* get used to playing through any sort of an FRFR system in a live setting.

Was there anything about the K10 you tested that you felt was seriously lacking?

 

[joegold]

Meanwhile...
NS10s were known to be too bright in their first incarnation which is the version I've got, I think. I bought them circa 1985.
Guys used to put tissue paper over the tweeters to attenuate the highs.

I've blown and replaced the tweeters in my NS10s at least twice, maybe three times, back in the 80s and early 90s before I got hip to putting a fast-blow fuse in-line).
I think that the last time I replaced them I got a newer tweeter design that was supposed to not need the tissue anymore, but I'm not sure.

Although my studio setup doesn't allow me to easily A/B between these rented Yorkville studio monitors and the NS10s, I'm pretty sure the Yorkvilles are a bit brighter.

 

[Jay Mitchell]

NS10s were known to be too bright

"Rumored to be too bright" would have been a more accurate choice of words.

Guys used to put tissue paper over the tweeters to attenuate the highs.

I'm well aware of this "monkey see, monkey do" voodoo practice. That is evidence of nothing but superstition and mindless mimicry. FYI, tissue paper has almost no effect on the transmission of sound, even at high frequencies.

Although my studio setup doesn't allow me to easily A/B between these rented Yorkville studio monitors and the NS10s, I'm pretty sure the Yorkvilles are a bit brighter.

I manufacture studio monitors that are documented to have flat response and are recognized by the customers who use them in their recording studios to be transparent and revealing. I deal daily with loudspeakers that are flat in amplitude response and sonically transparent. I know extremely well the difference between artificially-boosted highs and natural levels of same, both from objective and subjective points of view.

Although I am not "endorsing" the product (or any other), I have both documented and verified by listening that the K10 is not "too bright." My definition of "too bright" - one that is shared by most knowledgeable professionals in audio - is "producing excessive levels of high frequencies." Whatever high-frequency sounds you do not like when you play through a K10 are present in the signal you're applying at its input.

I'm done arguing with you on this one. You clearly have an opinion, and you are highly resistant to letting facts influence it. If you don't like how your Axe-Fx sounds through a K10, by all means play through whatever you like. From this experience, it is clear to me that your sonic preferences are not for accuracy.

 

[xrist04]

I'd like to thank both Scott and Jay for sharing their insights on the QSC K10 and its use with the Axe-Fx. The information about compensating EQ and HF phase-reversal is highly valuable to me, and I'm grateful to both for their work and for their generosity in sharing the results. Thanks, guys!

A few weeks ago I acquired a K10 at a particularly advantageous price. I've liked many things about this powered monitor, but after applying what I've learned in this thread, the K10 is just that much better for my application.

 

[Jay Mitchell]

One point needs to be stressed, as Joey seems intent on completely obscuring it: I neither endorse nor recommend the use of QSC K10s. I'll say yet again that, in taking a look at the speaker, I was simply helping a friend get the best possible result from the tools he has to work with. Nothing more, nothing less. Do not make of this more than it is.

Allegations to the effect that I approve of, endorse, recommend, etc., etc., this speaker - or any other - are false.

 

[scotts]

Here's a game:
We have established that the K10, especially with the posted adjustments, presents a neutral enough canvas to paint Axe pictures on. Accept this diagnosis of the K10 as read for a while. Think only about the Axe.

Forget about what your favorite guitar amp sounds like for a while. Lose all the names in your head: EV this, NS that, tube, real, etc.
Pay no attention to the names of the various amp models and IRs in the Axe.
Don't go for any sound in particular. Play with a few models and IRs and just try to create something you like even if it sounds different than your preconceived tone notions.

Thought #1: I have played the above game on myself over and over during the course of my 1-1/2 years of Axe ownership. I hit a point where I started enjoying the Axe as its own instrument. I no longer care if it sounds like this or that traditional amp. I no longer care if my rig sounds like this or that traditional rig. I have a sonic presentation that I can completely vibe with and I can reproduce it very accurately in any venue I play in. I no longer reference traditional rigs in my mind. I vibe with my Axe rig deeper than any traditional rig I have ever created. For the last six months (and for the first time in 30+ years) I don't think about traditional guitar amps at all. I wish the amp models in the AxeII were re-namable. I would start at the beginning and call them 1, 2, 3, 4, etc. and interact with them that way.

Thought #2: One of my favorite Metheny albums is "Rejoicing". The guitar soundscape is very off the beaten path and not at all mimicking this amp or that. Metheny really created his own voice on that one. The ability to venture out at this level and redefine what a guitar voice can be is part of the reason guys like Metheny, Scofield and Frisell are widely respected as major paradigm shifters and why guys like us are not. This kind of thinking is the direction I am trying to move in.

 

[joegold]

I'm done arguing with you on this one.

Geez man.
I'm not arguing with you.
I'm trying to have a conversation with you.
You deal with scientific facts. That's cool.
I deal with my musical experience and with my subjective musical needs.
And my experience tells me that playing through my EVM-12Ls is more satisfying musically for me than playing through the K10.
Playing through the two studio monitors I've tried is also more satisfying than playing though the K10.
On the contrary. You're trying to argue with me about my own subjective experience and tastes.
Good luck with that.

If and when I figure out how to make the K10 sound as musical as these other speakers, that's when I'll start using it.
All your facts and tests aren't going to make the K10 sound any better to me I'm afraid, so I'll probably just go ahead and keep using my 12L's, if that's all the same to you?

I'm not trying to convince you that the K10s have too much top end anymore.
You've convinced me that its hi-end content is pretty flat according to industry standard definitions of that term.
What I'm saying is that I don't like the way the top end that it produces sounds like.
*You* can't argue with *that*.
That's not an opinion. It's my *subjective* experience.
I'm sorry that bothers you.

My comments about the old NS10 lore were just that, comments, conversation.
I'm not "arguing" with you. I'm just trying to put my own experiences into context.
Again, I thank you for taking the time to check out scott's K10.
It's good to know that it's as flat as it is.

But, I really have no idea why you feel the need to be so combative with nearly everybody who tries to engage with you on this or any forum.
It's really a drag.
Most of us know who you are now and pay you as much respect, within your area of expertise, as we can.
The least you could do when you're talking to us is to realize that we are not scientists and we do not understand the terms you use as precisely as you do.
We're just trying to play the f...... guitar.
You need to factor that in more and cut us all a lot more slack.

 

[joegold]

One point needs to be stressed, as Joey seems intent on completely obscuring it: I neither endorse nor recommend the use of QSC K10s. I'll say yet again that, in taking a look at the speaker, I was simply helping a friend get the best possible result from the tools he has to work with. Nothing more, nothing less. Do not make of this more than it is.

Allegations to the effect that I approve of, endorse, recommend, etc., etc., this speaker - or any other - are false.

"Allegations". Oh my.
You said the K10 was fairly flat once the corrective EQ is applied, didn't you?
You've said that flat is what we should look for in an FRFR speaker to use with the Axe, didn't you?
You've said that there are better FRFR speakers that can be bought but they are much more expensive, haven't you?
Well, I'm sorry, but to me, that seems like a nod of sorts to the K10 as being a viable FRFR solution for the Axe in this price range.
I realize that for a pro in your position giving out actual endorsements on a public forum like this is a bit of a professional no-no.
But I've asked you to tell us what you didn't like about the K10 too and have heard nothing back about that.
If it's fairly flat and there's no other glaring problems with the speakers then whether you intend it to be seen this way or not, *that's* an endorsement of sorts.

 

[LMO]

Here is a company I highly recommend for testing: Electro-Acoustic Testing Company.

Here are their rates: ETCINC.US - Pricing. This is an incredibly good deal.

It doesn't make much sense to me to spend $1500 to test a sub-$1000 speaker, unless a group wants to go in together on it. It would be interesting to see how a low-end coaxial design compares. Anyone up for having an Ma-12 tested?